Conferences & Symposia

Maryland Court of Special Appeals

November 10, 2008

On Monday, Nov. 10, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals will sit to hear oral arguments in the School of Law's Ceremonial Moot Court Room. Students, faculty, and friends are invited to attend. Oral arguments will begin at 9:30 a.m., and each side will have 20 minutes to make their argument.

Overflow seating featuring a simulcast of the arguments will be available in Room 309, if needed.

Case Summaries

Howard v. State of Maryland(Second Degree Assault)
Defendant appeals his conviction on assault and gun possession charges arising out of a domestic violence incident with his girlfriend. The defendant argues that the trial court erred in allowing the prosecution to present evidence of his prior acts of violence against his girlfriend when it did not allow defendant to offer evidence of the girlfriendís past arrests for acts of domestic violence against him.

Williams, Sr. v. State of Maryland(Robbery with a Deadly Weapon)
Defendant appeals his conviction on three counts of robbery, including robbery with a deadly weapon, which was not produced at trial. Issues on appeal include whether the trial court erred in admitting or excluding particular evidence, whether the prosecutorís conduct denied defendant a fair trial, and whether the conviction is supported by legally sufficient evidence.

Perez v. GEICO, et al.(Summary Judgment Motion - Auto Insurance)
Defendant Perez bought a car from Norris Nissan. Through his interactions with the Norris dealership Perez believed that he had purchased comprehensive insurance for the vehicle. Five days after buying the car, he totaled it and suffered personal injuries. He later learned that the car was insured only for collision. Perez first filed for bankruptcy but didnít list his potential negligence claim against Norris and GEICO as a personal asset. He later filed a negligence suit against Norris and GEICO in state court, but summary judgment was granted for defendants on the basis that Perez lacked standing to sue because the Bankruptcy Court had jurisdiction over the claim. Perez re-opened his bankruptcy suit to add the claim, closed that case and filed a second negligence suit in state court. Summary judgment was again granted on the basis of collateral estoppel, res judicata and other grounds. Perez challenges this decision.

Thomas v. State of Maryland(Bribery)
A Prince Georgeís County official was convicted of solicitation and conspiracy to commit bribery of a company seeking to obtain a security management contract with the county. Defendant argued that he lacked apparent authority to enter into the contract on behalf of the County. He appeals the trial courtís jury instruction on bribery and its decision to allow one of the companyís employees to testify that he believed defendant had the authority to enter into the contract.

State of Maryland v. Karmand(Illegal Sentence)
Defendant pled guilty to one count of distribution of cocaine. On a motion for reconsideration, the court entered an order striking the conviction and granting defendant probation before judgment. The trial court granted the motion and the State appealed.